Quality Assurance System for Dragon Fruit

Le V. To, Nguyen Ngu, Nguyen D. Duc, Dang T.K. Trinh, Nguyen C. Thanh,
Dang V.H. Mien, Chau N. Hai and Trinh N. Long*

Abstract
Dragon plant (Cereus undatus (Haw.)) has been grown on a large scale since 1990 in Vietnam and is an
attractive product for foreign consumers. However, the problems that affect the fruit quality have not yet been
studied. The establishment of a quality assurance system for the dragon fruit, as part of the Quality Assurance
Systems for ASEAN Fruits project of the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN)Australia
Economic Cooperation Program, was carried out in various farms and packing houses in Binh Thuan Province
as well as in the laboratory of the Post-Harvest Technology Institute in Ho Chi Minh City (PHTI-HCM). The
program involved PHTI-HCM, the departments of Technologies, Sciences and Environment, and Agricultural
Extension of Binh Thuan Province, farmers, collectors, transporters, exporters, and importers. The quality
standards, and methods of packing, storage, shipping, and handling, have been formulated to meet the
requirements of both local and export markets.
In this study, the appropriate pre- and postharvest technologies for dragon fruit were generated and
disseminated to the end users. The optimal harvesting times vary between the 25th and 28th days after flowering
for export fruit, and the 2930th days after flowering for local markets. The physico-chemical changes
occurring during the fruit maturity period, such as respiration rate, total soluble solids, total acidity, firmness,
skin colour, etc., were determined and used for evaluation of shelf life. Translucent flesh, an indicator of fruit
chilling injury, was also determined. The chilling sensitivity of fruit depends on the harvesting time. They were
more sensitive 25 days after flowering as compared to the rest of the experimental period. Dragon fruit should
be stored at 5C and 90% relative humidity to prolong its postharvest life. Application of potassium
permanganate solution (0.2%) can extend the storage life to 40 days. During the postharvest period, common
fungal pathogens such as Fusarium lateritium, Aspergillus niger and A. flavus were found and a fungicide
mixture (benomyl and copper oxide chloride) was applied to control them.

THE DRAGON plant (Cereus undatus (Haw.)) comes
from South America. Its fruit has been popular in
Vietnam for a long time. In 1990, the Government of
Vietnam supported the industry through extension
programs that resulted in the export of between about
3,000 to 7,000 t per year between 1992 and 1997. The
main importing countries for dragon fruit are China,
Hong Kong, Singapore, and Taiwan. Because of its
taste, attractive colour, and high nutritive values, the
local and overseas markets for the fruit are growing.
However, fruit quality is a problem that needs to be
improved in order to meet market requirements.
The growing of the dragon plant is very attractive to
farmers because they can get more income from
* Post-Harvest Technology Institute, 45 Dinh Tien Hoang
Street, District 1, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.
dragon fruit than from crops such as rice, maize, and
beans grown in the same area. Therefore, the gov-
ernment is strongly supporting the expansion of the
dragon fruit production. The current research, devel-
opment, and extension programs on postharvest
technology focus on: the determination of the best har-
vesting time; prevention and control of insects such as
ants, an unknown pest species of lepidopteran, and
fruit fly; the use of plant growth regulators; and
methods of handling and storage of the fruits. The
work is supported by the Australian Agency for Inter-
national Development (AusAID) through its project
Quality Assurance Systems for ASEAN Fruits. The
results of the projects dragon fruit activities are
reported here.

101

Quality assurance in agricultural produce,

edited by G.I. Johnson, Le Van To, Nguyen Duy Duc and M.C. Webb.
ACIAR Proceedings 100
(printed version published in 2000)
 Materials and Methods
Survey and data collection
A survey was conducted in the project site at Binh
Thuan Province. Data on farming practices, hazard
factors, and the related information on the production
and marketing of the dragon fruit were collected and
analysed.
Questionnaires on product description were sent to
farmers, collectors, importers, exporters, transpor-
tation managers, quality managers, wholesalers,
retailers, and consumers for their comments, sugges-
tions, and recommendations. The product description
was then prepared and disseminated to the parties
concerned.
The cooperators were selected from among farmers
who attended a training course on postharvest
handling and who participated in the quality assurance
system of the project.
The participants in the system were:
Post-Harvest Technology Institute, Ho Chi Minh
City;
Department of Science and Technology and
Environment of Binh Thuan Province;
Department of Agricultural Extension of Binh
Thuan Province;
collectorNgo Van Tu;
exporterVan Loi Company;
importerKien Ping Company, Hong Kong;
retailersCoopmart, Super Bowl, Mien Dong
supermarket; and
farmersVo Van Tuyet, Le Van Mai, Vo Hong
Chien.
Harvesting index determination
The study was conducted in a three-year-old
dragon-fruit production farm at Ham Hiep village,
Ham Thuan Nam District, Binh Thuan Province. In the
morning on 5 June 1998, 170 flowers on the east side
and the same number on the west side of the plants
were randomly tagged. Those flowers had opened on
the previous evening.
From the 16th day (21 June) after the date of flow-
ering, 30 fruit from each side were harvested at 3-day
intervals. The harvesting time was 4.00 p.m. and the
fruit were transported to the Post-Harvest Technology
Institute (PHTI) at 7 a.m. on the following day.
Ten fruit were selected for measuring of their
diameters (cm), weights (g), and skin colours (value
102
Quality assurance in agricultural produce,
edited by G.I. Johnson, Le Van To, Nguyen Duy Duc and M.C. Webb.
ACIAR Proceedings 100
(printed version published in 2000)
(L*), hue (a*), and chroma (b*) using the Minolta
colour meter).
A separate batch of 10 fruit was placed in the respi-
ration containers for 24 hours and their respiration
rates (RR) at harvest time were measured by the con-
tinuous airflow method (170 mL/min), using CO2
analysing equipment (infrared absorption model ZFP
YAl) at 2224C. The formula of respiration rate is
calculated as follows:
RR (mg CO2/kg/h) = [(C1 C0) L 60 273 44
1,000] [100 22.4 (t + 273) M] (1)
where:
C1 = CO2 concentration (%) of sample;
C0 = CO2 concentration (%) of control;
L = airflow rate (mL/min);
273 = Kelvin temperature (K);
t = temperature in degrees Celsius;
44 = molecular weight of CO2;
22.4 = volume (mole); and
M = sample weight (g).
The last 10 fruit were used for measuring titratable
acidity (concentration of citric acid equivalent (mL)
per volume of juice), total soluble solids (Brix), total
solids content (% dry weight) and specific gravity (g/
mL).
With portions of these same fruits, and based on a
10-point hedonic scale, a panel of three judges
assessed the pulp-eating quality of the fruit.
Chilling sensitivity
At 25, 30, and 35 days after flowering, 48 fruit were
harvested and held in four cooling cabinets, 12 to each
cabinet, at constant temperatures of 2C, 0C, 4C,
and 6C.
The skin colour of two fruit from each cabinet was
observed and recorded each day. Then, three days
later, two fruit from each cabinet were removed to
room temperature. The skin colour, firmness, total
soluble solids (TSS), titratable acidity (TA), and
eating quality of one fruit was measured. The other
fruit was held at the room temperature for three days,
then its skin colour, firmness, and TSS were deter-
mined using a Minolta Colorimeter CR200b, a
penetrometer (with a large head), and hand-held
refractometer from Atago, respectively. The TA of the
fruit was measured by titration with 0.1 N NaOH and
indicated as percentage citric acid. Eating quality was
also determined and recorded.
Translucency, which is a symptom of chilling
injury, was estimated on a 0 to 5 scale, where 0 is no
translucency and 5 is the highest translucency.
 Results and Discussion 50
Pineapple
45
Harvesting index Dragon fruit
40
Respiration rate
35
Figure 1 shows that the maximum respiration rate of

Shelf life (days)

dragon fruit occurred 19 days after flowering. The res- 30
piration rate at that time was about 283 mg CO2/kg/h.
25
However, on and after the 22nd day, these respiration Longan
rates fell abruptly and varied between 50 and 120 mg 20
CO2/kg/h, perhaps indicating that the fruit had entered
15
the maturation phase. Data show that dragon fruit is a
non-climacteric fruit; it has a low respiration rate 10
during the maturation period and should be harvested Soursop
5
when ripe for good quality. The relationship between
respiration and shelf life is indicated in Figure 2. 0
Dragon fruits shelf-life can be 3045 days under 10.77 36.5 63.27 350
optimal conditions. Respiration rate (mL/kg/h)

Acidity Figure 2. Respiration rate and shelf life of some

Sixteen days after flowering the acidity of flesh
increased for a few days then fell abruptly and
remained in low concentrations until harvest. The data
show that these values varied from 0.23% to a high of
1.41% at the 16th and 22nd days after flowering,
respectively. However, three days after that, acidity
fell to 0.62% and remained below 0.40% for the rest of
the observation period (Figure 3). This suggests that
during the early stage of fruit development, the process
of biosynthesis of organic acids was taking place
resulting in an increasing H+ concentration. An
antocyan pigment cycle layer appeared between flesh
and skin, then expanded outward and the colour of the
skin became red on the 19th day.
CO2 production (mg/kg/h)
tropical fruits under the optimal storage
conditions.
Total soluble solids (TSS)
The values TSS of the fruit varied from the lowest
(5.4Brix) on the 19th day to the highest one (15.2Brix)
on the 43rd day (Figure 4). The data indicate that TSS
increased rapidly during the early stages of fruit devel-
opment. The value of TSS was above 12Brix when the
fruit was 25-days old, and was maintained between
1216Brix during the observation period. This is why
our farmers wanted to keep the fruit on the tree longer,
in order to get sweeter fruit.

300

250

200

150

100

50

0
16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43
Days after flowering

Figure 1. Change in respiration rate during fruit development.

103

Quality assurance in agricultural produce,

edited by G.I. Johnson, Le Van To, Nguyen Duy Duc and M.C. Webb.
ACIAR Proceedings 100
(printed version published in 2000)
 1.6
1.4
Acidity (% citric acid)

1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43
Days after flowering

Figure 3. Change in acidity during fruit development.

16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43
Days after flowering

Figure 4. Change in total soluble solids (TSS) during fruit development.

However, consumers in the international market
prefer dragon fruit that are not very sweet. Therefore,
the appropriate harvesting date for fruit for export
should be based on the TSS/acidity ratio, which is the
most important factor indicating the value of the fruit.
Normally, the acceptable TSS/acidity values vary,
depending on the kind of fruit. For dragon fruit this
value may be 40. Figure 5 indicates that the fruit
achieved this value at 31 days after flowering.
Moreover, the data also indicate that if the market
prefers the taste of the fruit either less sweet or sweeter
it can be harvested earlier or later than 31 days,
respectively.
Firmness
Figure 6 shows that the firmness fell rapidly
between the 16th to 25th days after flowering, with
values of 2.4 kg and 0.82 kg, respectively. They then
fell to between 0.45 and 0.90 kg for the rest of the
observation period. This parameter indicates that the
harvesting time should be determined by the softness
of the fruit. If the fruit are very soft (firmness <0.90
kg), handling and transportation become difficult.
Greater damage will occur and the market value of the
fruit will fall.
Change in peel colour
Changes in the colour of the peel of dragon fruit are
very difficult to distinguish. However, a standard
colour index for the fruit is needed to help the people
understand and decide the correct harvesting time.
Figure 7 indicates the changes of value (L*), hue (a*)
and chroma (b*). The L* value varies little, ranging
from a low of 44.2 to a high of 53.4. Generally, this

104

Quality assurance in agricultural produce,

edited by G.I. Johnson, Le Van To, Nguyen Duy Duc and M.C. Webb.
ACIAR Proceedings 100
(printed version published in 2000)
value changed little during the observation period. The
values of chroma (b*) were about 52 to 53.5 until the
fruit was 22 days old. They then fell to below 15
during the rest of the observation period. Data indicate
that value (L*) and chroma (b*) could not be used
alone to determine the harvesting time because they
changed little. On the other hand, the values of hue
(a*) ranged between 18.217.6 in the early stage of
70
TSS (Brix)/acidity ratio
fruit development, but abruptly rose to 30.1 or higher
when the fruit was 25 days old. These data are useful
for the determination of the appropriate harvesting
time in order to have the preferable TSS/acidity ratio.
For example, if the selected TSS/acidity ratio is 40,
then the values of the three parameters, value (L*), hue
(a*) and chroma (b*), should be 44.2, 35.5 and 0.8,
respectively.

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43
Days after flowering
Figure 5. Change in the total soluble solids (TSS)/acidity ratio during fruit development.
3
Pressure (kg)

0
16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43
Days after flowering
Figure 6. Change in firmness during fruit development.
60 value L*
50
40
chroma b*
Colour index

30
20
10
0
16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43
hue a* Days after flowering

Figure 7. Changes in the colour of dragon fruit during development.

105

Quality assurance in agricultural produce,

edited by G.I. Johnson, Le Van To, Nguyen Duy Duc and M.C. Webb.
ACIAR Proceedings 100
(printed version published in 2000)
Eating quality harvested on 3035th day after flowering to avoid
The eating quality of fruit was determined using a chilling damage during storage.
hedonic scale. Figure 8 shows that the lowest hedonic
value was 3.1 when the fruit was 22 days old. This
Table 1. Effects of storage temperature (C) and age
value was 8.1 when the fruit started ripening at 25 days of dragon fruit on chilling sensitivity
after flowering. The highest score (8.5) was recorded (translucency) measured after 17 days of
when the mature fruit were 2831 days old. This storage.
coincides with the preferred TSS/acidity ratio as
indicated in Figure 5. However, the quality of the fruit Temperature Days after flowering (age of the
was maintained until the 43rd day (Figure 8). It has (C) fruit)
been mentioned above the sweetness or TSS of the
25 30 35
fruits was high during that period (Figure 4). At 43
days, the hedonic score was 8.3, which means that 2 5 5 5
some people want to eat a sweeter fruit. 0 5 5 5
4 4 2 2
Fruit development
6 4 1 1
Figure 9 illustrates fruit development towards and
past optimal harvest time.
Fungi on stored dragon fruit
Chilling sensitivity The following species of fungi were found on
dragon fruit during storage:
Table 1 indicates that at temperatures of 0C and Alternaria alternata, A. cheiranthi, Aspergillus
below, regardless of the age of the fruit, after 17 days avenaceus, A. awamori, A. clavalus, A. flavus var.
of storage, translucency of the fruit was maximal columnaris, A. fumigatus, A. oryzae, A. niger, A. tub-
(score 5). When fruit were harvested at 25 days old and ingensis, Curvularia lunata, C. oryzae, Cladosporium
stored at 46C the translucency score was 4. When oxysporum, Corynespora abelavata, Fusarium semi-
3035-day-old fruit were stored at 4 and 6C, the tectum, F. lateritium, Haplariopsis fagicola, Mucor
translucency scores fell to 2 and 1, respectively. It was hiernalis, Penicillium charlesii and Syncephalastrum
also observed that at 6C, the 25-day-old fruit was racemosum.
injured after 7 days of storage, whereas injury to the 30
and 35-day-old fruit was not evident until 17 days of
storage. The results indicate that fruit should be

9
Eating quality (hedonic scale)

8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43
Days after flowering

Figure 8. Eating quality of fruit during fruit development.

106

Quality assurance in agricultural produce,

edited by G.I. Johnson, Le Van To, Nguyen Duy Duc and M.C. Webb.
ACIAR Proceedings 100
(printed version published in 2000)
 ***

Figure 9. Development of dragon fruit from flowering to harvest. The image marked *** shows
the fruit at optimal harvest time: 2831 days after flowering; total soluble solids(TSS),
1314%; titratable acid (TA), 0.3%; TSS/TA 40; colour index 45, 35, 8 (L*, a*, b*); and
firmness, 0.87 kg.

107

Quality assurance in agricultural produce,

edited by G.I. Johnson, Le Van To, Nguyen Duy Duc and M.C. Webb.
ACIAR Proceedings 100
(printed version published in 2000)
Nutrient composition and residues of potassium and is exceeded in this mineral by only
pesticides on dragon fruit banana and jackfruit (Table 4).
Dragon fruit is relatively tolerant of pests and
diseases. Dragon plants can grow over a range of soils
Table 2 gives measurements of the composition of
and climates, but produce the best quality fruit and
the endocarp of dragon fruit examined in this study. In
highest yields when grown on low-nutrient, sandy
all samples, the main component was moisture
coastal soils and at high air temperatures, conditions
(84.086.0 g/100 g), with little protein (0.931.33 g/
such as are found in Binh Thuan Province of Vietnam.
100 g) or fat (0.401.01 g/100 g). Crude fibre was
Moreover, pesticides have rarely been used in dragon
around 0.881.84 g/100 g. Carbohydrate composition
fruit production, as indicated by the results in Table 5.
was found to be 10.412.3 g/100 g. Glucose was
present at 4.636.39 g/100 g, fructose at 2.164.06 g/
100 g. There was no maltose or sucrose, but sorbitol Quality Assurance System
was determined at about 0.33 g/100 g.
Table 3 gives the vitamin and mineral composition
Quality assurance plan
of the endocarp of dragon fruit. The levels of vitamin The quality assurance plan for dragon fruit is shown
C, ranging from 1.0 to 6.3 mg/100 g, were at nutri- diagrammatically in Figure 10. Figure 11 illustrates
tionally insignificant levels. Thiamin and riboflavin market quality requirements and the defects caused by
were not detected. The two main minerals found were pests, and improper transportation, cultural, and
iron at 1.957.4 mg/100 g and potassium at storage practices. Table 6 shows the hazard
181.0321.0 mg/100 g). analysisdragon fruit marketing chain in Binh Thuan
Dragon fruit has a lower energy value than banana Province, and Table 7 provides details of appropriate
or jack-fruit but is equal to durian, mango, and pine- product descriptions for dragon fruit.
apple. However, its carbohydrate content is lower than
any of those fruits. Some other minerals, such as iron,
zinc, sodium, magnesium, are higher than found in
other fruits. In particular, dragon fruit is rich in

Table 2. Composition of red dragon fruit (g/100 g edible portion).

Test\sample 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Average
Fruit weight (g) 351.24 454.31 443.34 358.66 350.88 353.81 357.58 413.94 409.91 444.49 393.82
Moisture 85.60 86.00 85.20 84.30 84.00 85.30 85.50 85.60 85.50 85.60 85.30
Crude protein 1.06 1.33 0.95 0.95 0.96 1.13 1.28 1.11 1.33 0.93 1.10
Fat 0.54 0.44 0.43 1.01 0.73 0.40 0.65 0.57 0.43 0.45 0.57
Glucose 6.10 6.39 5.15 5.62 4.63 5.41 6.25 5.94 5.40 6.14 5.70
Fructose 3.42 4.06 2.36 2.16 3.28 2.47 3.74 3.75 2.98 3.81 3.20
Sucrose ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
Maltose ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
Sorbitol 0.47 0.34 0.54 0.39 0.45 0.24 0.23 0.16 0.20 0.25 0.33
Carbohydrate 10.40 10.40 11.90 11.90 12.30 11.40 10.70 10.60 10.40 11.80 11.20
Crude fibre 1.84 1.29 1.06 1.24 1.48 1.19 1.21 1.50 1.75 0.88 1.34
Ash 0.58 0.53 0.47 0.59 0.51 0.62 0.68 0.61 0.60 0.39 0.56
Energy (kcal) 66.40 64.40 63.80 69.50 75.30 67.60 67.40 70.50 65.10 67.10 67.70
Source: Data provided by S.T. Chew, Primary Production Department, Singapore for report to the third meeting of the
Quality Assurance Systems for ASEAN Fruits project, Jakarta, Indonesia, 12 December 1997.
Note: ND = not detected.

108

Quality assurance in agricultural produce,

edited by G.I. Johnson, Le Van To, Nguyen Duy Duc and M.C. Webb.
ACIAR Proceedings 100
(printed version published in 2000)
Table 3. Vitamin and mineral composition of dragon fruit (mg/100 g edible portion).

Test/sample 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Average
Vitamin C 1.5 3.1 1.9 5.3 6.3 4.1 4.1 1.5 1.0 1.0 3.0
Thiamin ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
Riboflavin ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
Niacin 2.8 2.5 2.3 3.1 3.1 2.8 2.4 3.5 3.2 2.3 2.8
Vitamin A 0.0090 0.0078 0.0063 0.0186 0.0123 0.0120 0.0114 0.0117 0.0147 0.0066 0.0111
Calcium 8.0 8.5 7.6 9.9 8.8 11.1 12.8 15.6 11.3 8.3 10.2
Iron 2.41 3.18 2.83 7.4 1.95 3.21 4.04 2.47 2.84 3.37
Magnesium 34.5 37.9 38.0 40.6 38.7 41.2 44.3 42.4 42.1 29.5 38.9
Phosphorus 31.8 27.2 25.5 27.3 26.4 24.6 29.8 29.1 30.7 22.8 27.5
Potassium 263.0 267.0 236.0 299.0 241.0 300.0 310.0 321.0 306.0 181.0 272.0
Sodium 6.9 8.9 5.9 13.5 13.0 9.5 10.1 5.8 5.0 l0.5 8.9
Zinc 0.29 0.38 0.34 0.42 0.34 0.33 0.26 0.37 0.34 0.38 0.35
Source: Data provided by S.T. Chew, Primary Production Department, Singapore for report to the third meeting of the
Quality Assurance Systems for ASEAN Fruits project, Jakarta, Indonesia, 12 December 1997.
Note: ND = not detected.

Table 4. Comparison of the composition of some tropical fruits.

Component Mangosteen Banana Durian Jackfruit Mango Pineapple Dragon fruit

Moisture (%) 83.4 75.7 81.1 72.0 81.7 85.3 85.3
Energy (kcal) 57.0 85.0 67.0 98.0 66.0 58.0 67.7
Protein (g) 0.5 1.1 2.2 1.3 0.7 0.3 1.1
Fats (g) 0.3 0.2 0.8 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.57
Carbohydrates (g) 14.7 22.2 14.8 25.4 16.8 13.7 11.2
Fibre (g) 5.0 0.5 1.6 1.0 0.9 0.4 1.34
Calcium (mg) 10.0 3.0 8.0 22.0 10.0 17.0 10.2
Phosphorus (mg) 10.0 18.0 38.0 38.0 13.0 8.0 27.5
Sodium (mg) 1.0 1.0 2.0 7.0 1.0 8.9
Magnesium (mg) 21.8 8.8 13.0 38.9
Potassium (mg) 135.0 398.0 407.0 189.0 146.0 272.0
Iron (mg) 0.5 0.10 0.70 0.40 0.50 3.37
Zinc (mg) 0.20 0 0.21 0.35
Source: Data provided by S.T. Chew, Primary Production Department, Singapore for report to the third meeting of the
Quality Assurance Systems for ASEAN Fruits project, Jakarta, Indonesia, 12 December 1997.

109

Quality assurance in agricultural produce,

edited by G.I. Johnson, Le Van To, Nguyen Duy Duc and M.C. Webb.
ACIAR Proceedings 100
(printed version published in 2000)
Table 5. Analyses of the edible (flesh) portion of dragon fruit for pesticide residues.

Tests/sample 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Average

Organochlorine ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
compounds
Organophosphorus ND M= ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
compounds 0.52 ppm
Pyrethroids ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
Dithiocarbamates ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
N-methyl-carbamates ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
Source: Data provided by S.T. Chew, Primary Production Department, Singapore for report to the third meeting of the
Quality Assurance Systems for ASEAN Fruits project, Jakarta, Indonesia, 12 December 1997.
Note: ND = not detected.

Table 6. Hazard analysisdragon fruit marketing chain in Binh Thuan Province.

Problem Probable Potential Critical limits Monitoring Corrective Documents/ Further

cause control required action records action
measure required
Production: Using plant Time of At least 12 Agro- Follow dose Agro-
abnormal growth application days after extensionist to and time of extensionist to
shape of fruit regulators flowering monitor application document and
(hormones) in recommended show
the wrong way by supplier photograph
Splitting Irrigation Time of Not more than Agro- Follow Agro-
Prolonged harvesting 35 days after extensionist to recommendati extensionist to
ripening of flowering monitor ons of agro- document and
fruit on plant Limited extensionists show
irrigation after photograph
ripening

Bracts not Prolonged Time of 10 days after Distributor, Storage PHTIa and
straight; ripening of harvesting harvesting wholesaler, technology handler study
curled down, fruit on plant Adjust under normal and retailer to
away from Inappropriate consumption conditions monitor
body consumption of fruit
plan
Smoothness Insects Chemical and Under study Agro- Under study Extension Study
of skin other measures extensionist to Centre and species of
monitor Dept of insects
Science. and
Technology control
and measures
Environment
a PHTI = Post-Harvest Technology Institute.

110

Quality assurance in agricultural produce,

edited by G.I. Johnson, Le Van To, Nguyen Duy Duc and M.C. Webb.
ACIAR Proceedings 100
(printed version published in 2000)
Table 7. Product description for dragon fruit.

Description No. 1 (top quality export No. 2 (suitable for Not acceptable Managing the problem
fruit) selected export and (unsuitable for No. 1 or
domestic markets) No. 2 grade)
Fungal damage Nil Nil Present Control aphids in the
field.
Eliminate sooty mould
from the packinghouse.
Insect damage Lepidoptera damage Lepidoptera damage Lepidoptera damage Monitor to detect
(min.) (blemished) Ant damage infestations in the field.
Ant damage (min.) Ant damage (blemished) Fruit spotting bug Use suitable control
Fruit spotting bug (min.) Fruit spotting bug Fruit fly measures (see booklet
(blemished) Controlling insects in
dragon fruit for further
details).
Skin splitting Nil Minimal Worse than minimal Harvest fruit before
splitting occurs.
Cuts and Nil Nil Cuts Harvest fruit gently.
punctures Punctures Transport fruit gently to
prevent damage.
Check baskets and crates
for rough or sharp edges.
Avoid dropping fruit.
Foreign matter Nil Nil Chemical residues Keep harvesting crates
Dirt on fruit and baskets clean and in
good condition.
Do not place harvested
fruit on the ground.
Remove any dirt,
chemical, insect residue
etc. from fruit at the
packinghouse.
Bruising Bruise (pressure mark) Avoid over-stacking
baskets and cartons,
which could cause
pressure damage and
fruit bruising.
Fruit shape Well shaped Slightly misshappen Apply hormone sprays
correctly (see booklet
Hormone sprays in
dragon fruit for detailed
information).
Fruit colour Good, full red colour At least 70% red (Russetted fruit are Harvest fruit at the
over entire fruit coloration on body of unacceptable) correct maturity stage.
fruit and extending into
bracts

111

Quality assurance in agricultural produce,

edited by G.I. Johnson, Le Van To, Nguyen Duy Duc and M.C. Webb.
ACIAR Proceedings 100
(printed version published in 2000)
Table 7. (Contd) Product description for dragon fruit.

Description No. 1 (top quality export No. 2 (suitable for Not acceptable Managing the problem
fruit) selected export and (unsuitable for No. 1 or
domestic markets) No. 2 grade)
Bract shape and Bracts firm + green at Bract may show Yellow bracts Apply hormone sprays
colour tips + sides yellowing, but be at least Bracts not upright correctly (see booklet
light green at the tips Hormone sprays in
and be upright dragon fruit for detailed
information).
Internal colour Flesh shall be white + Flesh shall be white + Milky or transluscent Harvest before fruit
+ firmness firm firm flesh not acceptable become over mature
Do not store for too long
after harvest (maximum
1 week at 20C and 4
weeks at 7C).
Green spots Nil Up to 3 spots Apply hormone sprays
correctly (see booklet
Hormone sprays in
dragon fruit for detailed
information).
Fruit weight Extra large: > 500 g Extra large: > 500 g Avoid producing small
Large: >380500 g Large: >380500 g fruit by using irrigation
Regular: >300380 g Regular: >300380 g and optimum fertiliser
Medium: 260300 g applications (see booklet
Small: <260 g Fertilizing dragon fruit
for detailed
information).
Thinning of fruit may
sometimes be necessary
when crop load is too
heavy.

Conclusions
A system of quality assurance for dragon fruit has
been introduced and accepted by dragon plant
growers, quality managers, importers, and exporters.
The program of quality assurance for dragon fruit
could be extended and applied to other fruits, modified
as required.
Acknowledgments
The authors are grateful to AusAID for financial
assistance that enabled this study. The authors are
indebted to Dr Graham Alexander, Mr Bruce Peacock,
Mrs Marie Piccone, Mr Colin Bunt, Dr Vic Reyes, Mrs
Robin Shaw, Dr Greg Johnson, and Dr Chew Siang
Thai for their kind assistance and cooperation

112

Quality assurance in agricultural produce,

edited by G.I. Johnson, Le Van To, Nguyen Duy Duc and M.C. Webb.
ACIAR Proceedings 100
(printed version published in 2000)
 Quality assurance plan

Production
Grower
1. Planting

2. Fertiliser practices

3. Irrigation Field diary

4. Field pest and disease control measures Fertiliser

Irrigation

Field handlng Insect disease control

1. Harvest maturity selection

2. Harvest production

3. Handling of harvested fruit in the field

Packing shed operations Packing shed operator

1. Unloading

2. Cleaning

3. Application of postharvest fungicides

4. Quality grading
Quality grading control
5. Packaging
Package inspection report

Transport
1. Loading on trucks

2. Actions to be taken on breakdown

Export
company
Exporter
1. Container loading

2. Pre-cooling of container

3. Loading inspection

Loading inspection record

Wholesaler/importer Importer/wholesaler
1. Arrival inspection
Arrival inspection report
2. Storage

Figure 10. Steps in the dragon fruit quality assurance plan.

113

Quality assurance in agricultural produce,

edited by G.I. Johnson, Le Van To, Nguyen Duy Duc and M.C. Webb.
ACIAR Proceedings 100
(printed version published in 2000)
Ant damage Coleoptera damage

Aphid damage Cuts

QUALITY MARKET
REQUIREMENTS

Weight:
>300 g

Bruising Good shape Puncture

Full red colour

Firm, hard,
and green
bracts

Milky and firm

flesh

Dirt Not damaged by Green spots

disease

Maximum of 1
spot damaged
or green spot
caused by
insect.

Yellow bracts Abnormal colour

Overripening Chilling injury

Figure 11. Market quality requirements for dragon fruit and defects caused by various agencies and improper
practices.

114

Quality assurance in agricultural produce,

edited by G.I. Johnson, Le Van To, Nguyen Duy Duc and M.C. Webb.
ACIAR Proceedings 100
(printed version published in 2000)